Special Exposure Cohort Petition US. Department of Health and Human Services
under the Energy Employees Occupational Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
Nines Compensation Act National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health,

. OMB Number. 0920-0639 Expires: 05/31/2007
Special Exposure Cohort Petition — Form B * Appendix — Petitioner 3

Survivor information —
Bi Name of Survivor:

Complete Section B if you are a Survivor or representing a Survivor.

Mr Mrs Ms First Name Middle Initial Last Name
B2 Social Security Number of Survivor:
B3 Address of Survivor:

Street Apt # P.O Box

City’ State Zip Code
B4 Telephone Number of Survivor: ) :
85 Email Address of Survivor: _.
B.6  Relationshipto Employee: Spouse. Q Son/Daughter Parent

Q Grandparent

7 Grandchitd

C1 Name of Em;

(inyiis MMs First Name Middle initial Last Name

C2 Former Name of Employee (eg , maiden name/legal name change/other):

Mr /Mis IMs’ ‘First Name pete Last Name.
C3 Social Security Number of Em: ployee:

C4 Address of Emplovee (if livina)-

7 P.O. Box

City State Zip Code

C5 Telephone Number of Employee:
C6 Email Address of Employee:

C7 Employment Information Related to Petition:
C7a_ Employee Number (if known):

C.7b Dates of Employment: Start End
C7c EmployerNamer AMES LAB
C7d Work Site Location: (OWS STATE UNIVERSITY -AMES LAB

Supervisor's Name:

Sign Part G of the-original petition.

Name or Social Security Number of First Petitione:_GAVRENCE FOUORTE



4

qhe radiation weasurenents which were
yadiation up to 22 ar/nr. It can be seen

dations are followed, it should be possible

. to within acceptable lintts.

Recommendations :
In order to reduce airborne contamination in the thorium and beryllium
areas, the following recomendations are presented:

1. Thorium Production

LS

thoriun nitrate tetrahydrate into hoppers

of thorius nitrate tetrehydrate should be perfarsed
dnside same hood. This hood should slso include allt
i apparatus required for the extraction opers-
tion and should be adequately ventilated.

Rec. £2 Eliminate broom sweeping» Use vacuum cleaner whieh
should be exhausted out of doors.

Res. #3 Flininate use of cooling fans.
Rete fh Provide wall exhaust fan pehind slurry tanks.
b. Caleining and Hydrofluorination Area

peo. #5 Jocal exhaust ventilation should be provided at front
of cryers-and calcining furnaces. . .

A epoctd be davined to transport trays from
Jeedite hood to dryer and caleiner and UF furasces end
packe

Rec. #7 Seay weigh scsle should be inoorpersted with the lond-
ing hood.

Rec. #8 cooling areas and tables should be adequately ventile-
ted or hooded.

Rec. #6

USA 012519



ee ae
R4 eta ie tal
ee ¥

3. Analytical Procedure

ene,
OS Because of the unusuel decay characteristics of the thorius series,
4% would be well at this point to indicate briefly the analytical
methods which we used to derive the rests expressed in the report:

Be ‘camples were counted on an alpht scintillation counter ssmuning
2 30% self-absorption.

** De Senples were counted sa soon as received in the laboratory.
a Yhe tine of counting of samples veried fron 1 to 3 dsys after sam~-
ling. The first count was then extrapolated back to time of sampling.
&e All sarples were re-counted after one week to determine the
presence of long-lived sateriel. Counting procedure was identi-
eal to the first count.

a. The second count was subtracted fron the extrapolated first
eee count to yield the thoron daughter concentration; the second
count being the thorius concentration. No evaluation of sir- .
tome beta or ganua exitters wes made.

@, Beryllium sazples, which were taken at 2 rete of about 0.5 cubic
- meters per minute, were analysed on a solution photo-fluorineter
measuring the fluorescence of the berylliva worin caxplex.

It is not possible to mcasure the activity of thoren gas directly
with field equipment. Therefore, the neasurenent of thoron concen-
tration must be carried out indirectly by dateraining the alpha
activity of the thoros Ganghter products collected with airborne dust.
Sinee the helfelife of Pol (th &) is only 0.16 see., the alpbs

« activity that is used is that of the daughter products following
(fh B) which bas a halfelite of 10.6 hours.

atye

gne extrapolation of the daughter product activity at the tine of
eounting to the activity at the time of sampling is based on the decay
Th B, vaich is the slowest rete in the series following therea.
activity due to the long-lived thorium is determined by recount=
the sample after allowing the daughter products to decay.

Rg

‘

USA 012515



248 INDUSTRIAL MEDICINE

For purposes of analysis the men were classified by their super-
visors into four groups according to their probable exposure to ura~
nium, Those who were probably exposed to the greatest amount were
classed as group 1; those exposed to the next highest amount made up
group 2; those with very little but continuous exposure constituted

Table 7 1—Vrantum Excretion in Personnel, Group 1

Amount,
Sample Case g/liter

40
96
52
86
50
100
a4
0
200
126
86
uu
4
200
3
4g
40
29
5
u
3h

75 fav.)

Beoosreneenn

ud
12
13
14
15
16
M1
we
1
29
at

RB ewnseeranrnrsne se wenn

group 3; and those with only occasional incidental exposure formed
group 4, Results of the studies are summarized in Tables 7.1 to 7.4.
Values given are in most instances the average of duplicate analyses.
Yt will be noted that in several instances two or more analyses were
made of urine collectedfrom the same individuals, generally at inter-
vals of a few weeks or months.

In Table 7,5 the data given in Tables 7.1 to 7.4 are summarized to
indicate the degree of correlation between the exposure and the range
of the amount of uranium in the urine.

The urine studies described above were subjected to statistical
analysis by George Sacher. Of the values reported, 33 were the aver~
age of duplicate determinations. The deviations from the means of
the duplicate determinations were studied with the following results:

URANIUM EXCRETION STUDIES 249

Number of values (N) = 64 (one pair of values was discarded
for statistical reasons; x/o = 6.6)
Mean deviation from the means (M) = 1.69 g/liter

Standard deviation from the mean of each pair (9) = 2.8 ug/Lter

Table 1.2--Uranium Excretion in Personnel, Group 2

Amount,
Sample Case ug/liter
1 2 15
2 18 n
3 rt 18
4 18 38
8 18 at
6 " 40
7 18 at
8 19 33
9 19 58
10 20 39
u a 64
2 22 64
8 23 10
4 23 16
7 4 i
16 24 et
ww 25 8t
8 25 64
» 25 80
20 26 130
a a a0
2 28 108
23 28 64
24 29 64
25 30 28
2% 31 8
48 (av)

in 35 instances in which 0.05 ml of urine was used the amountof
quenching of fluorescence was determined by adding 0,01 ug of ura~
nium to another 0.05-ml sample of the same urine and noting the
diminution in expected fluorescence. The results may be summarized
as follows:

0-10 per cent quenching in 88 per cent of instances
10~20 per cent quenching in 11 per cent of instances
20-30 per cent quenching in 6 per cent of instances


Speciat Exposure Cohort Petition U.S. Department of Health and Human Services
under the Energy Employees Occupational Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
lilness Compensation Act National Institute for Occupational Safety and Heatth

. | OMB Number: 0920-0639 Expires: 05/31/2007:
Special Expesure Cohort Petition — Form B Page 7 of 7

Public Burden Statement

Public reporting burden for this collection of information is estimated fo average 300 minutes per response,
including time for reviewing instructions, gathering the information needed, and completing the form If you
have any comments regarding the burden estimate or any other aspect of this collection of information,
including suggestions for reducing this burden, send them to CDC Reports Clearance Officer, 1600 Clifton
Road, MS-E-11, Atlanta GA, 30333; ATTN:PRA 0920-0639 Do not send the completed petition form to this
address, Compléted petitions are to: be submitted to NIOSH at the-address-provided in these instructions:
Persons are not required to respond to the information collected on this form unless it displays a currently
valid OMB number

Privacy Act Advisement

in accordance with the Privacy Act of 1974, as amended (5 U S:C §652a), you are hereby nofified of the
following: _ - .

The Energy Employees Occupational IlIness Compensation Program Act (42 US C §§ 7384-7385}
(EEOICPA) authorizes the President to designate additional classes of employees to be included in the
Special Exposure Cohort (SEC) EEOICPA authorizes HHS to implement its responsibilities with the
assistance-of the National. Institute for Occupational Safety (NIOSH), an Institute of the Centers. for Disease
Control and Prevention Information obtained by NIOSH in connection with petitions for including additional
classes of employees in the SEC will be used to evaluate the petition and report findings to the Advisory
Board an Radiation and Worker Health and HES:

-| Records containing identifiable information become-part of ari existing NIOSH-system of records under the
Privacy Act, 09-20-147 "Occupational Health Epidemiological Studies anid EEOICPA Program Records’ ”
HHS/CDC/NIOSH * These records are treated in a confidential manner, unless otherwise compelled by law
Disclosures that NIOSH may need to make for the processing of your petition or other purposes are listed
below. a mes wee mae ve seen en ~

NIOSH may need to disclose personal identifying information to: (a) the Department of Energy, other federal
agencies, other government or private entities and to private sector employers to permit these entities to
retrieve records required by NIOSH; (b) identified witnesses as designated by NIOSH so that these
individuals can provide information to assist with the evaluation of SEC petitions; (c) contractors assisting
NIOSH; (d) collaborating researchers, under certain limited circumstances to conduct further investigations;
(e) Federal, state and local agencies for law enforcement purposes; and (f) a Member of Congress or a
Congressional staff member in response to a verified inquiry

This notice applies to all forms and informational requests that you may receive from NIOSH in connection
with the evaluation of an SEC petition.

Use of the NIOSH petition forms (A and B) is voluntary but your provision of information required by these
forms is mandatory for the consideration of a petition, as specified under 42 CFR Part 83 Petitions that fail to

provide required information may not be considered by HHS

Name or Social Security Number of First Petitioner: _Laurencse Fuortes



a

lec. #9 TO drums should be unloaded onto trays within the

~

eonfines of a hood.

Rees #10 Portable vacuum cleaner should te used in this ares. :
Eliminate ali broom and foxtail sweepinge

Rec. #11 AlL drums when not in use should be kept Lidded,
Thorlun Crade

Rec, #12 Provide ventilsted enclosure at, site of drum dumping
of Thr), into grinder. Enclosure should be provided
with drut access door, glove openings and cover un=
lidding device,

Rée. #13 Ventilation should be provided at charging and dis- .
charging ends of mixer.

Reo. #lh Centred vacuun systen should be installed for use in
the thoriun crude area.

Rec, #15 Provide local exhenst ventilation st bonb loading and
bomb capping areas.

Rec. #16 Vacuum cleat tops and sides of bomb before transport-
ing same to topping and capping sreas.

1

Fetal Casting

Rec. #17 Provides floor grill type exhaust hood at site of dump=
ing desinced billets from grephite pots. .

Rec. #19 Provide local exhaust ventilation at site of loading
.desinced billet into, beryllium erscitles ;

Reo, #19 Provide central vacuum cleaning systen in thorica
netel casting area and machining and berylliwa crv-
cible. Clean out area (Rooms 29922 and 15) -

Rete #20 Eliminate use of air hosing when cleaning off furnace
parts.

Rec, #21 Provide exhaust hood for furnace unloading, parts and
clean out area.

Rete #22 Exhaunt discharge portable vacuum cleaner now in use
. into ventilation systes or change to centrel vacuum -

systems

USA 012520



[Special Exposure Cohort Petition U.S. Department of Heaith and Human Services

under the Energy Employees Occupational Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
liness Compensation Act National Institute for Occupational Safety and Heaith

OMB Number: 0920-0639 Expires: 05/31/2007
Special Exposure Cohort Petition — Form B Page 6 of 7|

F.3 0 We have attached a teport from a health physicist or other individual with expertise in
radiation dose reconstruction documenting the limitations of existing DOE or AWE records on
radiation exposures at the facility, as relevant to the petition. The report specifies the basis for
believing these documented limitations might prevent the completion of dose reconstructions for
members of the class under 42 CFR Part 82 and related NIOSH technical implementation
guidelines.
(Attach report to the back of the petition form B

F.4 Ie have attached a scientific or technical report, issued by a government agency of the
Executive Branch of Government or the General Accounting Office, the Nuclear Regulatory
Commission, or the Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board, or published in a peer-reviewed
journai, that identifies dosimetry and related information that are unavailable (due to either a lack
of monitoring or the destruction or foss of records) for estimating the radiation doses of
employees covered by the petition
{Attach report to the back of the petition form .)

SA
e of Perso P o 0 ete
All Petitiongrs 5 and date the petition. A maximum of three persons may ‘sign the petition.
‘ > 2470S
Sinature = Date
Signature Date
Signature Date
Notice: Any person who knowingly makes any false statement, misrepresentation, concealment of

fact or any other act of fraud to obtain compensation as provided under EEOICPA or who
knowingly accepts compensation to which that person is not entitled is subject to civil or
administrative remedies as well as felony criminal prosecution and may, under appropriate
criminal provisions, be punished by a fine or imprisonment or both. | affirm that the information
provided on this form is accurate and true.

Send this form to: SEC Petition
Office of Compensation Analysis and Support
NIOSH
4676 Columbia Parkway, MS-C-47
Cincinnati, OH 45226

Name or Social Security Number of First Petitioner: _Laurence Fuortes

we cece peecee



~

Ses rad

at

. aa Pod : > TAMERS

oo

taf

2. Thoron :
The following tables sumarize thé thoron exposure of the Anes
- production personnels

be of ited Thoron

aber of Persomel = aneae
: perere Exposure oo
Exvosnre (i/a/esierrse

ee of of Persons Jess than 2.2 x 10 i 86 kS.
2.2 X10 to heh x 10! G/a/Brrccseed (13,68
# 2,2 x 10! d/a/¥? mC for thoron. :

3. Seryliice

Two of the personnel xannfasturing cracibles were studied and were
found te be exposed_to acceptable daily weighted beryllium concen-
tration ef 0.95 YP. However, several of the operations studied
exposed these technicians to concentrations exceeding the AEC
naximm concentration for a single exposure by 6 to 8 times.. One
additional beryllium sample wes found to be 16 tines the allowed

single sample concentration.
Ho outdoor neighborhood survey was nade since the nature of the

Deryllius operations and the oxall avounts of naterial handled did
not constitute « problem.

seese.

ke Radiation Neasurexents

External rediation measurenents made in each of the thorium cpersting
areas showed excessive ancunts of radiation present in both the store

age and loading areas. ‘The highest radioactivity found wes 22 ar/ar
gem, raster tga 30 mrepa/ar beta (2610 B-U Survey Meter) end
100,000 €/a/L00eie aiptiny .

tnclufed in the tabulation of the radiosotivity measurenents re
values showing both growth ami decay of thorium daughters, -

Recommentations are included in this report which shold reduce existing
airborne contamination and external radiation at the various operations
and in the genere) laboratory are’,

USA 012513



E3

Es

Special Exposure Cohort Petition

under the Energy Emplayees Occupational
Wines Compensation Act ‘National Institute for Occupational Safely and Health

ecial Exposure Cohort Petition — Form B Page 4.of 7

. Chemisty Bidg, Wilhelm Halt

US. Department of Health and Human Services
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention

OMB Number: 0920-0639 Expires: 05/31/2007

Name of DOE or AWE Facility: Ames Laboratory, lowa State University —
Locations at the Facility relevant to this petition:

Ames Laboratory campus, AEC/DOE: factities including Annex 1, the old womens’ gymnaslum,“Litte Ankeny’,

List job titles and/or job duties of employees included in the class. in addition, you can list by
name any Individuals other than petitioners Identified on this farm who you believe should be
Included in this class; .

Sclantsts, prodtition Wolters, tachalclans, salaried graduate students, physical plant workers,
maintenaice, administrative and support steff* : a
Employmeitt Dates: relevant to this petition” - 8

Stet _ End “{.uraniom processing exposures
Stat _ End x yreniom and thorium processing, thoron gas

Start End and toa lesser extant radiated uranlum and plutonium exposures

is the petition based on one or more unmonitored, unrecorded, or inadequately monitored or
recorded exposure incidents?; Yes No : :

If yes, provide the date(s) of the incident(s) and a complete description (attach additional pages
as necessary): 7

‘The.work at Ames Lab during the Manhaitan Project period rough Unvolved further processing
of over-two milion’ pounds of uranium tetrafluoride, UF(4); “green salt” received from the purification

processes cartied-out by The Malinkrodt Chemical Company in StLouls MO. Malinirodt received crud "yellow che" °

(aminoniuny or sodium diiranate) trom vanous ore processors and dissolved the ores Innitie BOT

The uranium content was purified by a solvent extraction process involving disthyl ether. The extracted
Uranium of the uranyl nitrate was re: from the hexavalen zy nd prechat

” uranium tetrafluoride (which was dried and shi to Ames). At Ames, the uranium tetrafiuorlde (green salt)
was finely ground, mixed with pure, granulated magnesium metal (or possibly sodium or calcium), an

heated in the absence of air to obtain pure uranium metal, and separated from the magnesium fluoride slag
‘The uranium "biscults” were remelted, recast and machined into ingots, (lathed under of to specific tolerances)
and each ingot or the shaved uranium from the lathing process wes analyzed for possible contaminants before

shipping fo the reactor sites (University of Chicago and Oek Ridge). Descriptions of relevant processes and
exposures are continued below

Bote Part E —

Name or Social Security Number of First Petitioner: Laurence Fuortes

i
H
i

i
i
t



‘posure Cohort Petition U.S Department of Health and Human Services
Centers for Disezse Control and Prevention

‘National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health

OMB Number. 0920-0639 Expires: 05/31/2007
Page 1 of 2

i: Specia'
under the Energy Emplayees Cocupational
Wness Compensation Act

Petitioner Authorization Form

<a

Instructions:

If you wish to petition HHS to consider adding a class of employees to the Special Exposure Cohort and you f
are NOT either a member of that class, a survivor of a member of that class, or a labor organization i
representing or having represented members of that class, then 42 CFR Part 83, Section 83 7(c) requires i 5
that you obtain written authorization You can obtain such authorization from either an employee whe is a L :
member of the class or a survivor of such an employee You may use this form to obtain such authorization }
and submit the completed form to NIOSH with the related petition Please print legibly :

For Further Information: If you have questions about these instructions, please call the following NIOSH
toll-free phone number and request to speak fo someone in the Office of Compensation Analysis and

Support about an SEC petition: 1-800-356-4674

Authorization for Individual or Entity to Petition HHS on Behalf of a Class of Employees for .

eM BER OF,
| AMES LA® EMPLOYEES between __ - :

Name of Class Member or Survivor

~ Street Address of Class Member or Survivor Apt # PO Box

AMES rowA. . _
City, State, Zip Code of Class Member or Survivor

do hereby authorize:

LAY RENCE Eugg@tes

Name of Petitioner ol
OMI of TowA, ColLese of Poblic AEALTH, 2S WESTLAW 8 :
Address of Petitioner Apt & - P.Q Box... . :
EowA cery LA 62242 —
City, Stata and Zip Code of Petitioner
to petition the Department of Health and Human Services on behalf of a class of employees

that includes:
Ames LAB Work FORCE _.

Name of Class Member (employee, not the employee's survivor)

for the addition of the class to the Special Exposure Cohort, under the Energy Employee’s
Occupational Iliness Compensation Program Act (42 U.S.C §§ 7384-7385).

in providing this authorization, ! recognize that the petitioner named above will have all the rights
of= nolitinn=--g provided for under 42 CFR Part 83 4) :
£ __ a = _ °

Signqtuie Of Ciase ener ur Gur vive

ate

__ LAWRENCE Fooenres _

Name or Social Security Number of First Petitioner



Special Exposure Cohort Petition U.S. Department of Health and Human Services|
under the Energy Employees Occupational Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
| ness Compensation Act National institute for Occupational Satety and Health
. . OMB Number 0920-0639 Expires: 05/31/2007
Special Exposure Cohort Petition — Form B Page 6 of 7

F3  Q WWe have attached a report from a health physicist or other individual with expertise in
tadiation dose reconstruction documenting the limitations of existing DOE or AWE. records on
radiation exposures at the facility, as relevant fo the petition The report specifies the basis for
believing these documented limitations might prevent the completion of dose reconstructions for
members of the class under 42 CFR Part 82 and related NIOSH technical implementation
guidelines.
(Attach report fo the back of the petition form}

F4 0 IWehavea ‘Scientific-or techni sport, isstied by a’ government agency of the ©
Executive Branch of Government or the General Accounting Office, the Nuclear Regulatory
Commission, or the Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board, or published in a peer-reviewed
journal, that identifies dosimetry and related information that are unavailable (due to either a lack
of menitofing or the destruction or loss of records) for estimating-the radiation doses of
employeés covered by the-petition. .

(Attaeh report to:the-back of the:petition form.)

ic} Signature of Person(s) Submitting this Petition — Complete Section G.

All Petitionars shanid afamencd dnt~ ++~ =>tition, A maximum of three persons. may sign the petition.

__= 28> 0S

Srgnature ~ — Date
Signature Date
‘Signature : : ~ Date :
Notice: Any person who. knowingly makes any false statement, mistepresentation, concealment of

fact or any other act of fraud to obtain compensation as provided under EEOICPA or who
knowingly accepts compensation to which that person is not entitled is subject to civil or

cadministrative-remedies.as.well.as felony-criminal.prosecution.and.may,.undes appropriate ...,.
criminal provisions, be punished by a fine or imprisonment or both. { affirm that the information
provided on this form is accurate and true

Send this form to: SEC Petition
Office of Compensation Analysis and Support

NIOSH
4676 Columbia Parkway, MS-C-47

Cincinnati, OH 45226 :
endix Forms for'additional petition
of this document." °

ey must complete the
forms are located at thi

Name or Secial Security Number of First Petitioner:_Laurence Fuartes:



Hethod of S'
1, Sampling Procedures :

2.

- termined by dividing the alpha concentrati:

a. Thorim

Dost samples were collested on 1-2/8" Whataan fil filter peptts
using a 065 Cofeme Universal sir sampler. ‘The saxple gollection
. varied from thirty seconds to two hours, depending on

conditions of operation and dust loadings

the dust sasples collected divided into the following categories:

(2) General. air samples - a sample obtained of a general area
or room atmosphere,

(2) Breathing sone samples = # staple obtained in the actual
breathing sone of an operator during the performance of ®
particular task. :

b. Thoron

It is not possible with portable equipzent to measure thoron cone
centrations directly; therefere, the concentration of the thorén
daughter products, as collected with sirbome dust, is used as
an indleation of thoren activity. The dust collection media and
apparatus iz the eame 48 described aboves

Ce. Beryllium
Beryldun dust samples were collected on 10 cn. Bureau of Rines
ALL Past Filter, BM #2133, using & 360h5 cafe high volune sir

sampler. Periods of smpling varied from ons mints to 30 xinstes,
depending. on S88. eonditions as mentioned abovee

gob Analysis Shests :

rom the
are recorded. The average aipha concentration per 9 bour cay

is de-
on tines total time by the

USA 012514

total nuaber of einutes per day;

se



Special Exposure Cohort Petition U.S. Department of Health and Human Services
under the Energy Employees Occupational Centers for Disease Control and Prevention

Uness Compensation Act National institute for Occupational Safety and Health
| . . OMB Number: 0920-0639 Expires: 05/31/2007
Special Exposure Cohort Petition — Form 8 Page 1 of 7

of Social Security Number are voluntary. Failure to use this form or disclose

Use of this form and disctos: é
the denial of any right, benefit, or privilege: which you may be entitled:

this number will not resal i

General Instructions on Completing this Form (complete instructions are available in a separate packet):
Except for signatures, please PRINT all information clearly and neally on the form

Please read each of Parts A— G in this form and coniplete the parts appropriate to you {f there is more
than one petitioner, then each ‘petitioner shoul! complete those sections of parts A—C of the forny that apply
Hg, them... Additional: copiés..of the: first two: : of this Torm-ate provided at the’end of thé-form for this pur-
pose A meximum of thrée petitioners is aliowe
If vou need more space to provide additional information, use the continuation page provided at the end of
the form and attach the completed continuation page(s) to Form B

Hf you have questions about the use of this form, please call the following NIOSH toll-free phone number and

request to speak to someone in the Office of Compensation Analysis and Support about an SEC petition:
4-800-356-4674.

GIA Labor Organization, . “Star’atD on Page3
Ifyou GAn Energy Emptayee (current or former), StartatC on Page2
are; QA Survivor {of a former Energy Employee), . StattatB on Page 2
XA Repres ative (of a curtent.or former Energy Employee)... StartatA on Paget

A Representative Information — Complete Section A if you are authorized by an Employee or
Survivor(s} to petition on behalf of a class.

ization?’ C1 Yes (Go to A.2)

Are youa contact person for anvorgan:

X.No (Ga to AX
A2 Organization information: ” .

Name of Organization

Position of Contact Person
~ of Petiti ‘esentative:
As Name of Petition Representative J FUORTES, MD
Mr/Mrs /Ms First Name Middle Initial Last Name
[A4 Address:
UNIVERSITY OF IOWA, COLLEGE OF PUBLIC HEALTH, DEPARTMENT OF OGCUPATIONAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH
Sweet ROOF TP BOR
IOWA CITY A 52246
Giy State Zip Code

A5 Telephone Number; (319)335-9819
AG = Email Address: faurence-fuortes@uiowa.édu

IA7  X Check the box at left to indicate you have attached to the back of this form written authorization to
petition by the survivar(s) or employée(s) indicated in Parts B or C of this form An authorization

| If you are representing a Survivor, go to Part B; if you are representing an Employee, go to Part C.
i y

Name or Social Security Number of First Petitioner: Laurence Fuortes



U.S. Department of Health and Human Services
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
National Institute for Occupational Safely and Health

OMB Number. 0920-0639 Expires: 05/34/2007

Special Exposure Cohort Petition
under the tional
wae Ero Eres Opa

Petitioner Authorization Form . Page 4 of 2

instructions:

If you wish to petition HHS to consider adding a class of employees to the Special Exposure Cohort and you
are NOT elther a member of that class, a survivor of a member of that class, or a labor organization
representing or having representad members of that class, then 42 CFR Part 83, Section 83 7(¢) requires
that you obtain written authorization You can obtain such authorization from either an employee whe is a
member of the class or a survivor of such an employes You may use this form to obtain such authorization
and submit the completed form to NIOSH with the related petition Please print legibly

For Further Information: If you have questions about these Instructions, please call the following NIOSH
toll-free phone number and request to speak to someone in the Office of Compensation Analysis and
Support about an SEC petition: 1-800-356-4674

Authorization fort idual or Entity to Petition HHS on Behalf of a Class of Employees for
Addition to the Sp: t Exposure Cohort

1 AMES LAB SMmereré€s Between

Rama Af Dinan Mlambae ac Onan

Street Adrirace of Clace Mamher or Surviv pt # PO Box
x
ny, o1aIg, Zip Voue or Uiass Member or Survivor
do hereby authorize: .
LAV RENCE Fooetts m.O0.
Name of Petitioner
VAVERNTY 0F Tow A (outed oPyBLic WEALTH, 2S WETLAWN Bd
Addréss of Petitioner Apt # PO Box

ToWA city TA 52242
City, State and Zip Cods of Petitioner .
to petition the Department of Health and Human Services on behalf of a class of employees
that Includes:

AMES LAB Work toace . _

Name of Class Member (employee, not the employee's ‘survivor)

for the addition of the class to the Special Exposure Cohort, under the Energy Employee’s
Occupational titness Compensation Program Act (42 U.S.C. §§ 7384-7388).

In providing this authorization, I recognize that the petitioner named above will have all the rights

Om

Of a nefitinnar se nrmAAad fae mine 49 AND Dart 83, . -
e Lielaeve?e. ea
‘ 4 UF Wass MEMDEF OF SUVIVOT Date

Name or Social Security Number of First Petifione:  _LAVQE NCE Poo®tés

1
i



ae

ss Sy TARE
\* -

qhis is» repert of a prelininary survey perforesd during period

March 18-21, 1952 at the Ames Metallurgical Laboratories, Jowa State
College. ‘This survey, wade in response to « request from the Chicago
Operations Office, covered the health and safety probiens existing during
refining and thoriun metal production. In addition, a brief study vas
wade of several berylliun operations.

Purpose
This survey was nade uith the following objectives in minds

1. Yo gather data frou which an estimation of the daily weighted average
exposure can be deternined for the personnel working on the ABC pro-
Jects ‘ :

2. %o suggest the physical and procedural changes which should be mde
in order to correct excessive exposures.

Results of Study
1, Thoriun

Of the twenty-teo exployees atadied in the thorium production areas,
nine (hiS) were exposed to thorium concentrations exceeding the
naximun peraissible level; six esployees were exposed to concentre-
tions of 791 to 3200 alpha disintegretions per minute per cuble neter
of air (d/a/¥3). A complete breakdown of the daily weighted thorium
expomure ef the produstion personnel is as follows:

a. Sammzy of Dally Weighted Thoriua Emoncre

USA 012514



Box i

AMES@1 1286
AMES RESEARCH LABORATORY
ANES RESEARCH LABORATORY.

OCCUPATIONAL EXP OSURE TO THORTUM &
BERYLLIUM

|, U.S. Atomic Energy Commission

New York Operations Office
Health and Safety Division



This page left intentionally blank

L
t



Special Exposure Cohort Petition U.S. Department of Health and Human Services|

under the Energy Employees Occupational Centers for Disease Control and Prevention

{ness Compensation Act National Institute for Occupationat ‘Safety and Health

OMB Number: 0920-0639 ires: 05/31/2007

Special Exposure Cohort Petition — Form B er Page 7 of 7
Public Burden Statement

Public reporting burden for this collection of Information is estimated to average 300 minutes per response,
including time for reviewing instructions, gathering the information needed, and completing the form. if you
have any comments regarding the burden estimate or any other aspect of this collection of information,
including suggestions for reducing this burden, send them to CDC Reports Clearance Officer, 1600 Clifton
Road, MS-E-11, Atanta GA, 30333; ATTN:PRA 0920-0639 Do not send the completed petition form to this
address. Compieted petitions are to be submitted to NIOSH at the address provided in these instructions.
Persons are not required to respond to the information collected on this form unless it displays a currently
valid OMB number.

Privacy Act Advisement

In accordance with the Privacy Act of 1974, as amended {5 U.S.C. § 552a), you are hereby notified of the
following:

The Energy Employees Occupational lliness Compensation Program Act (42 U S.C. §§ 7384-7385)
(EEOICPA) authorizes the President to designate additional classes of employees to be included in the
Special Exposure Cohort (SEC). EEQICPA authorizes HHS to implement its responsibilities with the
assistance of the National Institute for Occupational Safety (NIOSH), an Institute of the Centers for Disease
Control and Prevention. Information obtained by NIOSH in connection with petitions for including additional
classes of employees in the SEC will be used to evaluate the Petition and report findings to the Advisory
Board on Radiation and Worker Health and HHS

Records containing identifiable information become part of an existing NIOSH system of records under the
Privacy Act, 09-20-147 “Occupational Health Epidemiological Studies and EEOICPA Program Records
HHS/CDC/NIOSH.” These records are treated in a confidential manner, unless otherwise compelied by law.
Disclosures that NIOSH may need to make for the Processing of your petition or other purposes are listed
below. oe

NIOSH may need to disclose personal identifying information to: (a) the Department of Energy, other federal
agencies, other government or private entities and to private sector employers to permit these entities to
Tetrieve records required by NIOSH; (b) identified witnesses as. designated by NIOSH so that these
individuals can provide information to assist with the evaluation of SEC petitions; (c) contractors assisting
NIOSH; (d) collaborating researchers, under certain limited circumstances to conduct further investigations;
(e) Federal, state and local agencies for law enforcement purposes; and (f) a Member of Congress or a
Congressional staff member in response te a verified inquiry.

This notice applies to all forms and informational requests that you may receive from NIOSH in connection
with the evaluation of an SEC petition.

Use of the NIOSH petition forms (A and B) is voluntary but your provision of information required by these
forms is mandatory for the consideration of a petition, as specified under 42 CFR Part 83 Petitions that fail to
provide required information may not be considered by HHS

Name or Social Security Number of First Petitioner: Laurence Fuortes

|
|

j
|



(Special Exposure Cohort Petition U.S. Department of Health and Human mere

under the Energy Employees Occupational Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
iliness Compensation Act National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health

. OMB Number. 0920-0639 Expires: 06/31/2007
Special Exposure Cohort Petition — Form B Page 2 of 7.

Survivor Information — Complete Section B if you are a Survivor or representing a Survivor.

B.1 Name of Survivor:

Mr @S¥iis First Name Middle Initial Last Nama
B2 — Soclat Security Number of Survivor:
Address of Survivor:
Street : ; Apt PO Box
City State "Zip Code

B84 Telephone Number of Survivor:
B85 Email Address of Survivor:

Bé6 Relationship to Employee:. spouse _ O Son/Daughter Q Parent
‘ Grandparent Q Grandchild

Name of Employee: 7 .

(id iitrs its” Pls Name Middte Iniial Last Name
C2 Former Name of Employee (eg, maiden namefegal name change/other):

Mr Mrs (Ms. First Name Middle initial ° . Last Name.
C3 Social Security Number of Em ployee: 7
C4 Address of Employee (if living):

“Street — Apt PO Box

City” State Zip Code
C5 Telephone Number of Employee: <'
C6 Email Address of Employee:

C7 Employment information Related to Petition:
C7a Employee Number (if known):

C7b Cates of Employment: Start —_ End

C7c¢ Employer Name: ANES 72aB

C7d Work Site Location: JOwa STATE UNIvERaily -ANES 2AB

C7e Supervisor's Name: a

Go to Part E.

Name or Social Security Number of First Petitioner: _Laurence Fuortes *



under the Energy Employees Occupational

Petitioner Authorization Form

instructor

If you wish to petition HHS to consider adding a class of employees to the Special Exposure Cohort and you
are NOT either a member of that class, a survivor of a member of that class, or a labor organization
representing or having represented members of that class, then 42 CFR Part 83, Section 83 7(c) requires
that you obtain written authorization. You can obtain such authorization from either an employee who is a
member of the class or a survivor of such an employee You may use this form to obtain such authorization
and submit the completed form to NIOSH with the related petition Please print legibly

For Further information: If you have questions about these instructions, please call the following NIOSH
toll-free phone number and request to speak to someone in the Office of Compensation Analysis and
Support about an SEC petition: 1-800-356-4674

Authorization for Individuat or Entity te to Petition HHS on Behalf of a Class of Employees for
Addition tothe

~ Pe BER ,
| AMES LAB emeLoyvees ee ween CA2~ SS

Name of Class Member or Survivor

Street Address of Class Member or Survivor Apt # . PO Box
AMES Tow A _
City, State, Zip Code of Class Member or Survivor
do hereby authorize:
LAL RENCE Fug ere s

City, State and Zip Code of Petitioner
to petition the Department of Health and Human Services on behalf of a class of employses.
that includes:
Amf> LAB woes FoRcE

Name of Class Member (employee, not the employee’s survivor)

for the addition of the class fo the Special Exposure Cohort, under the Energy Employee’s
Occupational Illness Compensation Program Act (42 U.S.C. §§ 7384-7385).

In providing this authorization, | recognize that the petitioner named above will have all the rights

Special Exposure Cohort Petition U.S Department of Health and Human Services
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention

Iiness Compensation Act National Institute for Occupational Safely and Health

OMB Number: 0920-0639 Expires: 05/31/2007
Page 1 of 2

Name of Petitioner

one : ° But TH, 2S WEST AWA BUG-
Address of Petitioner Apt # PO Box

ZowA ccry xh $2242,

of a vetitionar a2 nrovided far undar 49 GFR Part 83.
geo
k Lune jo 2
Sie @sS MeMDEI OF Survivor ie
Name or Social Security Number of First Petitioner: LAURENCE Fooerts

i
i



This page Jeft intentionaily blank



oF | COLLEGE OF PUBLIC HEALTH
"eg Department of Occupational and

te tye Environmental Health

BURLINGTON ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION PLANT
FORMER WORKER PROGRAM

Date June 29, 2005:

Dear Mr. Elliot,

. Please find enclosed an electronic copy of the Special Exposure.Cohort Petition (Draft) forthe
Ames Laboratory, Ames IA, Department of Energy workers, < . ¢

This petition covers period between January 1, 1942’and December 31,1855 and is based on
information indicating heavy exposures to uranium, thorium and thoron with little engineering
control, presumably inadequate personal protection and a lack of personal. radiation monitoring
results making accurate and timely dose reconstruction problematic or impossible.

Should you have any remarks, comments, or questions pledse contact us at 1-866-282-5818

Sincerely,

Laurence Fuortes M.D.

, The,University of lowa.
College of Public Health
2115 Westlawn
lowa City, 1A 52242
Laurence-fuortes@uiowa.edu

2185 Westlawn

‘owa City, lowe 52242
Toll Free 1-866-282-5818
Fax 319-353-5649

S

i



;

244 INDUSTRIAL MEDICINE

ox chronic, in human beings has never been described. Those bio-
chemical changes that have been deseribed as cecurring in animals
administered toxic doses of uranium’ are in no way specific for ura-
nium poisoning. Consequently the interpretation of the meaning of
such changes in any individual case is generally impossible, Meas-
urement of the concentration of uranium in the air of laboratories and
plants, although valuable, does not tell how much uranium is being
absorbed by given individuals, The analysis of the concentration of
uranium in urine, therefore, has been the most important test for
avaluating the amount of exposure of a given individual or group.

Considerable study has been made of the excretion of uranium by
experimental animais following acute exposure.? There is only one
report in the unclassified literature of the analysis of human urine
jor uranium. Holfman® reported the urine of an unexposed individual
to contain 1.5 x 107 g of uranium per liter, The accuracy of his la-
borious purification procedure,‘ however, is open to serious question.
‘The procedure is based on the visual comparison of the unknown with
graded standard beads, which, in half the cases, progressively in-
crease in intensity by factors of 5. In view of the limitations of the
method, the reporting of tissue uranium concentrations to three sig~
nificant figures’ seems unwarranted

Preliminary reports of excretion of uranium in human urine have
recently been issued by a number of laboratories associated with the
Manhattan Project and by sishilar groups in Canada and England.
These will not be considered here since final reports have een pre-
pared by the individual groups, Our own studies have been discussed
elsewhere,’ and many of the data in this chapter are taken from these

reports,

2, ANALYTICAL PROCEDURE

In general, uranium in biological materials is most commonly de-
termined by spectrographic or fluorometric methods of analysis or
by measurement of radioactivity. The applications and Limitations of
these and other methods are dealt with in exhaustive surveys else~
where in these volumes,”® Since only.the fluorometric method has
proved sufficiently sensitive to warrant its use in analyses of urine
for uranium, it alone will be considered here.

‘This method is based on the quantitative measurement af the yel-
lowish-green fluorescence emitted by uranium in fused sodium fluo-
ride irradiated with ultraviolet light. As little as 0.001 1g of uranium
in 300 mg of fused sodium fluoride may be detected visually by this
method, With the use of a very sensitive instrument, it has been pos~
sible to quantitate as little as 0.0001 ug of uranium.’ This sensitivity

URANIUM EXCRETION STUDIES 246

is of crucialimportance since impurities present in only 1 ml of urine
may produce as much as 50 per cent or more quenching of the fluo-
rescence, Only slight quenching, however, is produced by the ashed
residue from 0,05 to 0.10 ml of urine so that the uranium may be
analyzed in this amount of urine by directly evaporating to dryness in
a platinum dish, ashing over an open flame, and fusing with NaF with-
out resort to any purification. The amount of fluorescence is then
measured with a specially constructed fluorophotometer. As many as
40 or more careful duplicate analyses per day may be made by one
skilled operator.

Detailed studies to test the accuracy of the methodunder conditions
of contamination by various quenching substances are reported else~
where.’ These studies have shown that the percentage of fluorescence
quenching is a function of the ratio of quenching substance to sodium
fluoride; it is not a function of the ratio of uranium to sodium fluoride
except when the concentration of uranium is several micrograms per
300 mg of NaF From this it follows that for any given sample of
urine, or other material, the fluorescence is a linear function of the
amount of uranium present, This is confirmed by the data in Fig. 7,1,

Verification of the accuracy of the method came from a special
study in which six different groups in the Manhattan Project analyzed
the uranium content of 30 urine samples to which had been added 0 to
2.16 mg of uranium per liter of urine ‘° The reported values, illus-
trated in Fig. 7.2, were found to agree most closely with the theoreti-
cal values,r?°

3 AVOIDANCE OF CONTAMINATION

Equal in importance to an adequate analytical method is the neces-
sity for scrupulous avoidance of contamination at all stages of the
analysis. Thus one investigator has pointed out that his early studies
agreed much better with atmospheric conditions than with known
levels of personnel exposure. In rainy weather, for example, all
values were low, whereas in dry weather all values were high be-
cause of atmospheric contamination from a nearby plant,

All careful workers have recognized the necessity for collection of
samples away from exposed areas, preferably immediately after a
shower, andfor analysis of samples in laboratories that are, them~
selves, not contaminated, The bottle into which the urine is passed
and all other equipment must likewise be kept exceptionally clean.
Washing in hot nitric acid will suffice for this purpose except in the
case of the platinum dishes, when repeated fusion with fresh sodium
fluoride may be necessary to dissolve last traces.of uranium that
have been baked into the dish.


242 INDUSTRIAL MEDICINE

96. G. Gomori, A Modification of the Colorimetric Phosphorus Determination for Use
with the Photoelectric Colorimeter, 3. Lab. Clin, Med., 27: 955 (1942).

97. I. Berenblum and 5. Chain, Studies on the Colorimetric Determination of Phos-
phorus, Biochem, 7., 82: 286 (1938).

98, W; Mefboune, Estimation of Small Amounts of Pentose, Especially in Derivatives
‘of Adenylic Acid, Z. physiol. Chem. , 258: 117 (1939),

99. Z. Dische, Ueber eine neue charakteristische Farbreaktionen der Thymonuklein-
saeure und cine Mikromethode zut Bestimmung derselben in tierischen Organen
mit Hilfe dieser Reaktionen, Mtkrochemie, 8: 4 (1930).

100. J. J. Nickson, Bload Changes in Human Beings Following Total-body Irradiation,
Paper 2, this volume.

101. L. H. Hempelman et al,, in preparation.

102, A. L, Dounce, E Roberts, and J. H. Wills, Catalacurta as a Sensitive Test for
‘Uranium Potsoning, in “Pharmacology and Toxicology of Uranium Compounds, ’”
edited by Carl Voegtlin and Harold C. Hodge, National Nuclear Energy Series,
Division VI, Volume 1, Chap. 14, McGraw-Hill Book Company, Inc., New York,
1949,

103. C. J. Watson, 8. Schwartz, W. Schulze, L. O. Jacobson, and R. Zagaria, Studies
of Coproporphyrin. III. Idiopathic Coproporphyrinurla; A Hitherto Unrecognized:
Form Chatacterized bs Lack of Symptoms in Spite of the Excretion of Large
‘Amounts of Coproporphyrin, J. Clin. Invest., 28: 465 (1049).

104. M. Wintrobe, personal communication.

108. C. J Watson, S. Schwartz, V. Sborav, and E, Bertie, Studies of Urobllinogen; a
Simple Method for the Quantitative Recording of the Ehrlich Reaction as Carried
Out with Urine and Feces, Am. J. Clin. Path, 14: 605 (1844).

106 W. M Dale, Effect of X-rays on Aqueous Solutions of Biologically Active Com-
pounds, Brit. J, Radiology, 16: 171 (1948),

107. C: J, Watson, ¥. Hawkineon, 8, Schwartz, and D. Sutherland, Studies of ‘Copropoi~
phyrin. I, ‘The Per Diem Excretion and Isomet Distribution of Copropqrphyrin in
Normal Human Urine, J. Clin, tavest., 28: 447 (1049). :

108, P. Skoog, The Effect of X-irradiation on Auxin and Plant Growth, }, Cellular
‘Comp. Physiol., 7: 227 (1935), ?

109. D. I. Macht, Effect of Roentgen Rays on the Toxicity of Blood, Am. 3. Roentgenol.
Radiam Therapy, 41: 709 (1939).

410, D.L. Macht and M. B. Macht, Phytotoxic Reactions of Blood Sera, J. Lab. Clin.

. Med., 26: 597 (1941).

411. W. Stenstrom and A. Lohmann, Effect of Roentgen Radiation on Solutions of Tyro-
sine, Phenol, and Ixyptophane, Radiology, 17: 482 (1931).

112. I. W. Graham, Radiation Sickness. Treatment with Nicotinic Acid, J, Am. Med,
Assoc., 113: 664 (1939).

113. I. A. Muntz, E. §.G. Barron, and C. L. Prosser, An Electrophoretic Study of the
Effects of X-rays on the Plasma Protein Pattern in Dogs, National Nuclear En-
ergy Series, Division IV, Volume 22 B; Metallurgical Laboratory Report CH-3560;
Manhattan District Declassified Report MDDC-371,

424. P, P. Cohen and F, Thompson, The Serum Protein Fraction Responsible for the
‘Thymol Turbidity Test, Proc, Cent. Soc. Clin, Research, 19: 8 (1946).

115. W, Seitz, Die reduzierende Witkung von Roentgenlicht auf ‘Redoxfarbstoffindicato-
ren, Strahlenthexrapie, 61: 140 (1938). .

116. N. Waterman, Ueber Aendorungen des red.~ox.-Potentiais 1m Serum durch Roent~
genbestrahlung, Z. Krebsforsch, 38: 301 (1933).

117, A. G. Forssherg, Studien ueber einige biologische Wirkungen der Roontgen- und y
Strahlen insbesondere am Phycomyces blakesteeanus, Acta Radiol., Supple-
mentum XLIX (1943),

118. ‘f, Caspersson, Methods for the Detexmtnation of the Absorption Spectra of Cell
Structures, J. Roy. Microseop. Soc. , 60: 8 ‘1940).

Chapter 7
URANIUM EXCRETION STUDIES*

By R. J. Ferretti, G. R. Price, and Samuel Schwartz

ABSTRACT

Since there are no clinical or biochemical tests known to be spe~
cific for uranium toxicity, the determination of uranium concentration
in urine has proved to be the most important single testfor the evalu-
ation of uranium exposure in Project personnel. This is illustrated
by data on 86 individuals exposed to uranium on the Ames, Chicago,
and Oak Ridge Projects. .

Values of over 100 yg of uranium per liter are found only rarely in
eventhe most heavily exposed individuals. Controlunexposed students
were found to excrete less than 1 wg of uranium per liter.

Because the fluorometric method used is sensitive to 0.0001 ng of
uranium, analyses were made using only 0.1 mlof urine. This sample
is evaporated to dryness ina platinum dish, ashed over a flame, and
fused with sodium fluoride without further purification. Fluorescence
is then measured with a specially constructed fluorophotometer.

4 INTRODUCTION

In evaluating the degree of human exposure to any metal it is com-
monly of decisive importance to determine the amount of that metal
in blood and excreta. This is especially true in the vast majority of
cases in which exposure is insufficient to cause clinical complaints
or abnormal biochemical findings. Even when these abnormal findings
result, thelr specificity can often be ascertained only by correlation
with an elevated blood o1 urine metal concentration.

Thesefacts have been especially apparent in the study of Manhattan
Project personnel The syndrome of uranium poisoning, whether acute

*Based on Metallurgical Laboratory Report CH-3592
2463


Rec. #7.

= _ £30 suiteble radiation warning signa should be provided in ali
- dros, tray and metal storage areas. The practice of roping
or auctioning off of areas where known direct radiation hazards

_ are present should be encouraged.

rene me

ke Gensral

BR Rec. $32 Install a persomel ronitering service which will include
. film badge service, radiation monitoring, ete.

Recs £33 Provide work clothes, cover shoes and shoes and hats for
- 21] operating per :

Rea, #3 Provide tes room change Jockers, ane for contaxinated .
clothing and the other for nen=coutaginated street clothes.

Rec. #35 Provide shower facilities for personnel,

Rec. #36 Provide supervisory control to insure adequate housekeeping
throughout the operating areass

. usa 01252 A



Industrial Hygiene Branch
Health and Safety Division :-

Date of Surveys March 18-21, 1952
Date of Report: daly Yh, 1952

(CLASSIFICATION CANCELLED,
|

IDATE %2O-b~ FR

: For The Atomic Energy Commission

ie 4 Const 2

| Chief, Declassification Braneli

‘pletefbution: ; oe -

: 26 . . .

#F 3 = Chicago Operations Offices - B.S. Atomic Energy Comission ‘

& "> . ke Pile : ‘Yew York Operations Office :
5 = Dive of Biology & Medicine Health and Gefety Division !
6 (Dr. Hardie) \

USA 012510



r

com np

UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT

Memorandum

TO : A. J. Breslin, Director, Health Protection DATE: September 26, 1962
Engineering Division, HASL

FROM : Lewis C. Cooper, Classification Officer, NY

Supject: DECLASSIFICATION REVIEW OF AMES-1 ENTITLED "t RESEARCH
LABORATORY - OCCUPATIONAL EXPOSURE TO THORIUM AND BERYLLIUM"
BY P. B. KLEVIN, HASL, JULY 14, 1952

TS¢:Lcc

Subject document has been declassified without deletions,
but must be handled as Official Use Only until released
by the Assistant General Counsel for Patents, ABC MQ.

Your declassified file copy is hereby returned.

Enclosure:
Subj. rpt.

ce: C. BE. Teeter, CH
R, As Anderson, PAT, RQ
H. S. Potter, NYPG, BE
P. B. Klevin, BH

USA 012509



Special Exposure Cohort Petition U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.

‘under the Energy Employees Occupational Centers for Disease Control and Prevention

pensation Act National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health

OMB Number: 0920-0639 Expires: 05/31/2007
Appendix — Conti

TRE Process of Uranium pUnTication by reduction involved Violent’ exothennic reaction performed in a Wwelve
lameter Gas Tired "soaking pit” in WHIGh five Toot Tong Tixed with magnesium, (calcium on

is Operating a imal Cay Tee SHS O} ‘ald reportedly aimpl ime. The gradiig

‘OFTHE "Green SAN” Ino in ‘accomplished wih Industral Cones grinding ml or

Teportedly des TKETS awakening pluries oF Gi SCO is pi ere Riis

Nares rested diring the night The workers) operating Wie gi Squpr Teter ren
SSpIratOT i 1a TOR OF S WAS apparently ai lem ine grading

i Of OMe TEACTOTS i DIUM and Fission Products Wor "Slugs" of In
irradi ran een the per roug UTES Were to Masses MUCI r than

‘onsisted Of USE OF TUbber Gf Without Shieian Was miro only 7

feleases of thonumn int From exo ic

jemmical simianues TE Tey ‘Several incor
Teaciions gone awry with resuttant contamination oF ie Chemistry Building. ne thorium pi WK was

Name or Social Security Number of First Petitioner: Laurence Fuortes



Special Exposure Cohort Petition U.S. Department of Health and Human Services

under the Energy Employees Occupational Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
iliness Compensation Act Nationa! Institute for Occupational Safety and Health

OMB Number: 0920-0639 ires: 06/31/2007
Special Exposure Cohort Petition — Form.B ames mal Page 6 of Z
Basis for Proposing that Records and Information are Ina adequate for individual Dose —

Complete Section F.
‘Complete at least one of the following entries in this: ‘section by checking the appropriate box and providing
the required Information related to the selection Yow are not required to complete more than one'entry
Fi  X We have attached either documents or statements provided by affidavit that indicate that.

. fadiation: exposures: and: radiation: doses, potentially incurred by members: ‘ofthe.praposéd-class;. |
that relate to this petition, were not monitored, either through Sersonat monitoting of through area

monitoring
(Attach documents and/or affidavits to the back of the petition form )

Describe as completely as possible, to:the extent it might be:unclear, how the attached
documentation and/or affidavit(s) indicate. that potential radiation exposures were nat monitored
Attached: gare hci from chapter 7, oF @ text entitled.’ Mei on the Ple futonivin

individuals stratified into four ups on the b ra to UF (4), These-assay

were collected on Monday. mmamings after: the most cet acre ending Saturday at noon
BUST CONCERNS Measured

aE 200 micrograms por Iter. ASS alached are _ ‘Of aréa radionuchde monitoring from a Survey of
the thorium processing activites In 1962 ented Occupational Exposure {0 Thortum and Berylium and.a PhO Thesis by
Or. Carolyir Stilts Payne from 1992 eritited The Anias Project Adiniristating. Classified! Reseaich

Fa} vilienave atacted : ied yada tha ct tht

radiation monttoring records for members of the proposed class have been lost, falsified, or
destroyed; or that there is no information tegarding monitoring, source, source term, or process
from the site where the employees worked.

(Attach documents and/or affidavits to the back of: the petition -forr y

Deseribs as completely as possible, to the extent it might be unclear, haw the attached
documentation andlor aff idavit(s) Indicate that radiation monitoring records for members ot the

er 3 ik th rave!
Anes a ois shauep een ie sb pie tnable i eM oS esta 4, radiation monitaring resuits

——_—Part Fis continued-on the following page—__—

Name or Social Security Number of First Petitioner._Laurence Fuortes

i
it
i
b

i



tetrafluoride to a dolenite-lined bomb and gas firing,
The biscuits are unloaded from the bomb and conveyed
manually to the thorium casting area.

” (h) Thorium Mets? Casting

By two successive vacuum furnace castings, the impure
thordum biseult is dexinced and terminally purified to
the thorium: billet.

(5) Fechining operations are thea performed on each of the
billets, ‘These operations include sawing, turning and
milling and cropping:

2. Beryllice

Beryligum operetions consist of the nanofactering of beryllium
shapes and crucibles from raw beryllium oxide.

Discussion

In order to interpret the data of this report, it is necessary to have
criteria for judging whether or not an exposure is potentially harardous,
For this purpose, the following maximum allowable concentrations are.

suggested:
1, Thorius.

Although there is no generally accepted MAC for thorium, we are
tentatively using 70 ¢/u/¥3, which is the level which has been 4n
use for some tins for insoluble uranium compeundas

2. Thoron:

Ae in the ‘case of thoriui, there is as yet no generally accepted 10
but the Conference Governmental Industrial Hygienists has tenta-
tively proposed 10~- ae eee rae, Ue Tales wed Sm thts report,
This ie equivalent to 2.2 x a

3. Beryllium:
: The Commission recomendations fer control of beryllium hazards arez
‘ &. ‘the ineplant atuospheric concentration of beryliiua at beryllius

operetions should not exceed 2 uicrograns per cubic aeter as en
average concentration throughout an 8 hour day,”

ts

a ary

~ USA 012517



5 ali Bo 5
Ezcoee me
eS

4 De Even though the daily average might be within the ts of -
recomsendation a, no personnel should bé exposed to a concen-
tration greater than 25 micrograms per cuble meter for any
period of time, however short. x

Ce In the neighberbood of an AEC plant handling beryllium cus
pounds, the average nonthly concentration at the breathing
sone level should not exceed 0.01 microgram per cubic meter.

In the course of the study, it was found that ol] thoron daughters «x-
posures and, therefore, the probable thoron exposure, except thet of
the EF operators, were below the perwissible limit and thst one enly
slightly above. ‘the thoriun exposures, on the other hand, were found
te be high in several cases, The operators working with theriun nitrate
tetrahydrate, thoriun oxalate end the caleined oxalate, in general, hed -
exposures to az high as 10 tines this the maximun expose
ure occurring to the HF operators of 3100 d/n/M*, ‘These individoel
values ere given in Table I. Table I, ubich shows the breakdown of
operations giving the individual exposures for each, indicates thet the
maxinum exposures cecurred.on the tray handling operations where values
of 12,000 and 17,000 d/a/¥? were founds These are single senpls values
while those above are daily weighted average exposures,

the following points were made in the meeting between Mr. Harris of this
office and various of the latoratory personnel:

1. In general, ventilation which is supplied to tie areas appears to.
be adequate. Most of the operations could be modified or controls

ecpplied xithout major expensts

2. Housekeeping in the industrial arses is poor and no edequate means
for housekeeping is provided:

3. Tracking through the laboratory is quite general and off-plant track-
ke Compressed air bose cleaning and man-oooling fens probably add sig-
nificantly to the dispersion of airborne dust .

able III, wich gives the averege general air eoncentrations,: indicates
very high concentrations in Room 303 (drying and calcining area) with
noderately high concentrations in various areas of Room 33.

As far as it was possible to investigate it during the perlod of study,
the weighted averages of exposures to derylisum are satisfactory In-
dividual high exposures were found, however,:which showld be corrected.

USA 012518



Special Exposure Cohort Petition U.S. Department of Health and Human Services
under the Energy Employses Occupational Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
Uiness Compensation Act Natiortal institute for Occupational Safety and Heath

OMB Number. 0920-0639 Expires: 05/31/2007
Petitioner Authorization Form er = Page 1 of 2

Use oft

Instructions:

If you wish to petition HHS to consider adding a class of employees to the Special Exposure Cohort and you
are NOT either a member of that class, a survivor of a member of that class, os a labor organization :
 représentingior having represented. members of that class, then 42, CER Part 83, Section 83:7(c) requires, A '
that you obtain vaitten authorization You can obtain such authorization from either an employee whois a ~~ ar as!
member of the class or a survivor of such an employee You may use this form to obtain such authorization : :
and submit the completed form to NIOSH with the related petition Please print legibly

For Furttier Information: if you have questions about these instructions, please call the following NIOSH
toll-free phone number arid request to speak to someane In the Office of Compensation Analysis and

| Support about an SEC petition: 1-800-356-4674 . .
Authorization for Individual or Entity to Petition HHS on Behalf of a Class of Employees for
Addition to the Special Exposure Cohort

, Ames LAB GmeLorb€s Between é i
Name of Class Member or Survivor : :

1022 GRAGS AVE }

a Street Address of Class Member or Surviver Apt # PO Box

ALWES Lows Soo ll

P City, State, Zip Cade’ of Class Member or Survivor ‘

do hereby: authorize: . : . t

LAVRES CE Ex ogces m0. y

Name of Petitioner !

DeUVERSTY OF Toes (othtee fPybiUUc HEALTH, ZiT WESTLAW BG i

» “Addressof Petitioner ~~ & “ weet ABB RS . P.O..Box , . r

DowA city TA F224)
City, State and Zio Gode of Petitioner
to petition the Department of Health and Human Services on behalf of a class of employees

that Includes:
AMES LAR Woke Foece _ i
Name of Class Member (employee, not the employee's survivor) t

for the addition of the class to the Speclal Exposure Cohort, under the Energy Employee’s
Occupational illness Compensation Program Act (42 U.S.C. §§ 7384-7385).

In providing this authorization, I recognize that the petitioner named above will have all the rights
ofa netitioner as provided far under 49 CEP Dart 83,

“Date ,

LAVRENCE FooRtés

Sigh yey v2 wn mane we Surety

Name or Social Security Number of First Petitioner:



FE

FA

F.2

Special

Complete at least one of the following entries in this section
the required information related to the selection You are not required to complete more than one entry

Special Exposure Cohort Petition U.S. Department of Health and Human Services
under the Energy Employees Occupational Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
lines Compensation Act Nationa! Institute for Occupational Safety and Health

. OMB Number: 0920-0639 Expires: 05/34/2007
posure Cohort Petition — Form B Page 5 of 7

Basis for Proposing that Records and information are Inadequate for individual Dose —
Complete Section F.

by checking the appropriate box and providing

X We have attached either documents or statements provided by affidavit that indicate that
radiation exposures and radiation doses potentially incurred by members of the proposed class,
that relate to this petition, were not monitored, either through personal monitoring or through area
monitoring, oo
(Attach documents and/or affidavits to the back of the petition form )

Describe as completely as possible, to the extent it might be unclear, how the attached
documentation and/or affidavit(s) indicate that potential radiation exposures were not monitored,

Attached are scanned pages from chapter 7 of a text antitied: “Industrial Medicine on the Plutonium
PrOJSCESU aCONe WH KCOPUBIShE

sO DY CO

Ct S S sulis-ofu exeration-resuits for 48
individuals stratified into four: on the basis of expected exposure to UF(4). These assays
were collected on Monday momings after the most racent exposure ending Saturday at noon

WO OF GIEV ETT WOTREPS WT URE TEST EXPOSUTS CHOTOTY NA UNNENY CXCTOUOT COTICEMMTELIONIS measured

al i ms per liter, at are results of area radio monitoring @ Survey of
the thorium processing actives i 1952 ented Occupational Exposure to Thorium and Beryllium anda PhO Thess by
Dr. Carolyn Stilts Payne from 1992 entitled The Ames Project: Administering Classified Research ..

e ached ¢ nts 0 ments provi by affidavit that indicate that
radiation monitoring records for members of the Proposed class have been lost, falsified, or
destroyed; or that there is no information fegarding monitoring, source, source term, or process
from the site where the employees worked. .

{Attach documents and/or affidavits to the back of the petition form.)

Describe as completely as possible, to the extent it might be unclear, how the attached
documentation and/or affidavit(s) indicate that radiation ‘monitoring records for members of the

RrmBS EAL SRIS US PRET OG plored legally or destroyed, radiation monitoring results
Part Et inued.on-the follow!

Name or Social Security Number of First Petitioner: _Laurence Fuortes

weeny eee vee



TABLE I :
TAILY WEIGHTED AVERAGE EXPOSURE « AMES LABORATORY

Yo. of Daily Weighted ponies
= oTron

: Binco Tnloader 1 7 22,000
operetor ‘ender 1 m 19,000
Deying operator 1 1500 - ~ 1,h00

BF Operators 2 z00 30,000
. Foreman, Thorium Crude 1 & 3,800
Boab Unloaders 2 bb 3,200
Borb Loaders 2 852 14,000
| Packing & Jolting 2 6 1,800
Weigh Man 2 pL 19,000
Foreman Metal Casting 1 0:89 1,900
Casting Cperator = 2 0,06 1,000
Half-tine Dezincing . .

Operators 3 49 : Us,000 :
mp ge ga |
or Mag Opera 6 6,400
operation i 26 ‘ 2,000

‘TOTAL, PERSONNEL 22

AVERAGE DAILY WEIGHTED CONCENTRATION 530 . 13,900

* Thorium date extrapolated to tine of samplings

ee

“USA 012523



260 INDUSTRIAL MEDICINE URANIUM EXCRETION STUDIES 261
In all six instances in which over 10 per cent quenching was found,
the urine was obtained from individuals in the uranium exposure
groups 1 and 2. Since these individuals were also exposed to metals

‘Table 7.3-—Uxantun Excretion in Personnel, Group 3

Amount,
Sample Case we/liter other than uranium, they would be expected to have larger amounts
i 32 4
a 33 at 200 TTT TTT dh
3 a 1 .
4 35 9
5 36 19
6 3t 2
1 38 a2
8 38 18 L 4
9 38 3 450
10 38 3
n 39 8 %
ota 40 16 5 END OF EXPOSURE
13 at 16 $
u a 33 3
18 @v) = 100
5
2
=
| Sable 7 4—Uranium Excretion in Personnel, Group 4 g
| Amount,
\ Sample Case ug/iiter 50
\
| 1 ® <3 ;
N 2 44 <a Hi
i 3 OF zt {
i 4 46 <3 i
6 a <3
6 48 9 9 ~
9-46 245 7-45 945 AS AG 3-46
<5 (av.) :

Pig, 7.8— Excretion of uranium in the urine of an individual exposed to various urant~
. um salts,
‘ ‘Table 7.5 —Correlation of Uranium Exposure and Urine Uranium

‘ Concentration in Iowa State College Project Personne!

of quenching materials in their urine than would nonexposed indi-
viduals.

A prolonged study was made of the urinary excretion of uranium by
one individual believed to have hid more exposure than any other in-

‘Percentage of samples containing uranium
No, of | No. of per liter as show

Group
individuals | semples > 15 3110-20 wg | 20-40 ug| 40-80 ug | 80-200 ne

4 6 6 100 0 0 0 0 dividual on the'Ames Project. His exposure began in March 1943 and
\ 3 u “ 35 29 88 0 0 ended July 1, 1945. He did not visit the plant thereafter.

a2 | 2 % oy} 4 a s 5 As noted in Fig. 7.3, 10 analyses made from September 1944 to

1 it ba ° 5 July 1945 rangdd from 24 to 200 zg of uranium por liter. Fifty analy~

ses during the: eight months after cessation of exposure showed a



254 INDUSTRIAL MEDICINE

5.1 Extrapolation from Experimental Animals to Human Beings.
Human exposure, compared to experimental animal exposure, is
unique in regard to duration, intensity, and multiplicity of exposures.
These factors and others, such as inherent metabolic differences and
differences in life span, make extrapolation from animals to human
beings difficult, In addition, limitations in accuracy and sensitivity of
analytical procedures have until recently permitted urinary uranium
analysis only in acute and subacute stages of uranium poisoning in
experimental animals, For the purpose of extrapolation it is essen-
tial that chronic urine and tissue studies be made.

By administering subcutaneously a more radioactive isotope of
uranium, Tannenbaum” has recently made relatively chronic studies
in mice. Extension of these studies to include the fate of uranium
administered slowly by pulmonasy or oral routes to coincide more
with human exposure would be very desirable.

5.2 Human-tissue Studies, The attempt should be made, whenever
possible, to make uranium analyses on tissues obtained at operation
or post-mortem examinations of exposed individuals. Simultaneous
urine studies should also be made.

5.8 Accuracy of Data. It should be unnecessary to potnt out that
human excretion and tissue-distribution data must be accurate, yet
achieving accuracy has heretofore been a serious problem, Our own
experience as well as that of numerous other groups attests the fu-
tility of making analyses except when contamination can be avoided
and when results are sufficiently accurate and can be reproduced.

ACRNOWLEDGMENTS

* ‘The authors are indebted to F. H. Spedding, E. Gladrow, and Elaine
Katz for their assistance in making the studies at Iowa State College
possible. We are also grateful to the medical officers of the Manhat-
tan District at Oak Ridge for the opportunity of studying other samples
from exposed personnel.

REFERENCES

1. 8. Schwartz, Biochemical Effects of Uranium Poisoning, in “Toxicology of Ura-
nium,’’ edited by Albert Tannenbaum, National Nuclear Energy Se1 ies, Division IV,
Volume 23, Chap. 6, McGraw-Hill Book Company, Inc., New York, 1951.

2, A. Tannenbaum, in “Toxicology of Uranium,” edited by Albert Tannenbaum, Na~
tional Naclear Energy Series, Division IV, Volunie 28, McGraw-Hill Book Com-
pany, Inc., New York, 1951

3. J. Hoffman, Wien, klin, Wochschr, , 62: £055 (1944).

4, J, Hottman, Sprechsaal, 18: 153 (140).

URANIUM EXCRETION STUDIES 2565

5. J. Hoffman, Biochem. Z,, 319: 377 (1943).
6. S. Schwartz, G R. Price, and R, Ferrett!, Reports CH-1742, May 1944; CH-1808,
June 1944; CH-3131, August 1044; CH-2311, Octotier 1044, CH-2420, October 1944;
CH-2510, December 1944; CH-2736, February 1945; CC-2085, July 1946.
7 M, Fred and C. J Rodden, in “‘Analytical Chemistry of ‘The Manhattan Project,”
edited by C. J. Rodden, National Nuclear Energy Series, Diviston VI, Volume 1,
McGraw-Hill Book Company, Inc., New York, 1960
8 C.J. Rodden and J. C Warf, in “Analytical Chemistry of Tho Manhattan Project,’*
edited by C.J. Rodden, National Nuclear Energy Series, Division VII, Volume 1,
McGraw-Hill Book Company, Inc , New York, 1966.
G.R Price, R. Ferrettl, and S. Schwartz, in National Nucleat Energy Serles, Di-
viston VIN, Volume 2,
10. M. J, Wantman and D. ¥. Tiedeman, in National Nuclear Energy Series, Division
VI, Volume 1, Chap. 3, McGraw-Hill Book Company, Inc . New York, 1949

11 A Tannenbaum, in “Toxicology of Uranium,” edited by Albert Tannenbaum, Na-
tional Nuclear Energy Series, Diviston IV, Volume 23, McGraw-Hill Book Com-
pany, Inc , New York, 1951.


U.S. Department of Health and Human Services
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health

OMB Number: 0920-0639 Expires: 05/31/2007
Special Exposure Cohort Petition — Form B Page 4 of 7

= Proposed Definition of Employee Class Covered by Petition — Complete Section E.
E.1 Name of DOE or AWE Facility:
£2 Locations at the Facility relevant to this petition:

Ames Laby carpus, AEC/DOE facilities Annex 4, the old womens' gymnasium, Lite Ankeny",
Chemistry Bidg, Wilheim Hall

Special Exposure Cohort Petition
under the Er Occupational
Wines Compensation con he re

E.3 List job titles and/or job duties of employees included In the class. In addition, you can list by
name any individuals other than petitioners identified on this form who you belleve should be
included in this class:

Scientists, production workers, technicians, salaried graduate students, physical plant workers,
maintenance, administrative and support staff
£4 Employment Dates relevant to this petition:

Start January 1.1942 End December 31,1945; for uranium processing exposures
Start January1,1945 End — December 31,1955; for uranium and thorium processing , thoron gas
Start End and to a lesser extent irradiated uranium and plutonium exposures.

E5 Is the petition based on one or more unmonitored, unrecorded, or inadequately monitored or
recorded exposure incldents?: © Yes Q No
If yes, provide the date(s) of the incident(s) and a complete. description (attach additional pages
as necessary):

The work at Ames Lab during the Manhattan Project period 1942 through 1945 involved further processing
of over two milion pounds of uranium tetrafluoride, UF(4), “green salt" received from the purification

ammonilim or Sodium diuranate) fom various ore processors and dissol ié ores in nitric acid.

The uranium content was puitied by @ solvent extraction process. owing diethyl ether. ‘The extracted *
uranium of the uranyl nifrate was re ; nt State fo its fetravalent stats and precipita

a8 uranium tetrafluoride (which was dried and shipped to Ames). At Ames, the uranium tetrafluoride (green salt)
was finély ground, mixed with pure, granulated magnesium metal (or possibly sodium or calcium), and

heated in the absence of air to obtain pure uranium metal, and separated from the magnesium fluoride slag.
The uranium "biscuits were remelted, recast and machined into ingots, (lathed under oif fo ‘Speciic tolerances)
and each ingot or the shaved uranium from the lathing process was analyzed for possible contaminants before

shipping to the reactor sites (University of Chicago and Oak Ridge). Descriptions of relevant processes and
exposures are continued below

-Go to Part F,

Name or Social Security Number of First Petitioner._Laurence Fuortes

processes carried out by The Matinkrodt Chemical Company in St.Louis,MO. Malinkrodt received crude “yellow cake”

{
r
i



sree a ) web ot IMs

4, = Daughter product activity at sampling time
se Ay = Total activity at first count
Aye Thorlum activity at second count
A a Ape dg » Daughter product activity at first count
A = Decay constent for TE
a. & = Maw after sampling
men, 2 = Age
And 4, nay be caleuisted.
‘the ratios of & to A, for several tines after sapling are giver belowt

The shortcomings of the method are the sosuxption that radiosctive equi-
Ubetan oxints an Se assumption ‘of complete collection of the daughter
products on agrh rae gts. However, it is the best method aveileble for

Process Deseription
a Thortun ;
(a) Thorium Refining & Metal Production

(1) Solution and Precipitation Stage

Thorium received as a nitrate in drums is weighed out and !
@issolved in dilute nitric acid and oxilic acid. Thorium H
oxalate, the precipitate, is filtered in an. Elmco press:. .
‘The thorius oxalate is dumped into 30 gal. drems in a desp :
state and sealed. 3

(2) Saleination and Bydrofluorinstion Stage

‘The damp thoriun oxalate is trensferred to trays and dried.
The dried thorinn oralate is weighed out in trays and calcined j
dn an electric muffle furnace at 1200° ¥. The trays contain- !
ing thoriun oxide are cooled and dumped into a leading heod. {
the thoriue oxide is transferred to flat type trays, weighed i
and then placed into reactors for hydrofluorinaticn to thoriua
tetrafluoride. The thorium tetrafluoride is cooled and pack~-

‘calciue reduction to the thorium biscult is secorplished by
adding a mixtare of sinc chloride, calcium fluoride and thorium

=e a * Ti a

e

“ga 012516



Special! Exposure Cohort Petition U.S Department of Health and Human Services
under the Energy Employees Occupational Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
itness Compensation Act National Insttute for Occupational Safety and Health

. OMB Number: 0920-0639 Expires: 05/31/2007
Special Exposure Cohort Petition — Form B Appendix — Continuation Pago

Continuation Page — Photocopy and complete as necessary.

In addition to the implications for elevated Uranium exposure and excretion documented in the textbook chapter
SPpEndet Deo, former Workers Nave HeSerbed the Uranium purificalion as a Custy Heavy-indus ty

ret 5S typical Of Wat Era. Unfortunately Tistorical records are Scant ar 1 Cherical

‘SPECIES PHYSICAL TorriT Eve GUaMMY OF UPATUMT 15 WITT WOTKEIS WETS EXDOSEC 1S CHMCUIT TS deternine Workers
were FEENTEN xSOSST UF) HREM DSS, SST ST OTE eT Urania Porentaly

rari i 7 Of Of ihe Wain we oi mr

from exothermic thermal reactions occurred at the Ames Lab on multiple occassions

(from our.worker respondents and Nr Paynes’ PAD Thesis_enclosed).

‘THE process of uranium purification by reduction mivolved & Violent” exolnemiic reaction performed Wa Welve

“ROOT CAMSTET Gas THE "Soaking pir” IA WHICH five Too! Tong “SOMES” of UF (4) mixed with magnesium, (calcium or}
SOCiuM}, Wer perature below the vaporization temperature oF the metal reducing agent ahd

SOGVE THE Vaporization Temperature of the UFT4), metal Nalde The uranium processing facility at Ames ~
WES Operalng al Maximal Capacily WI tree SHINS GT WOTKErS and reportedly ample overtime The grinding
OFIRE "GrSeh SAT” Into Nis pariculate was accomplishes with Industial cofies grinding mils One WorRer

TSPOTECIY CESCHBSE 10 CO-WOIKEIS AWAKENING To find PIUMIES OF Green UIScolOTatiOn on His plow wrere Tis
TaTES Tested GUTING IHS HIGHT Te WOIKEr(S) operaing tne Grinding equipment were referred to as “THE Green
HOMEY” RESPTAtOTy Provection 1h Te Tor OF Gust MASKS Was apparenuy aVallable 1h the grinding ang

TOI-PaCKING” GBETETONS DU TEpOTEAly Not UMToTEy used Apparently fio radiation badge Or area radiation

Fonloring date Were CONECtET OF are avaliable trom this eamliest era oF Operations at the Tab Based upon

WOTKEF TISTONES There WETE INET |ESSer Vleld unmonTtored potential radiation EXPOSUTES as WET at The TaD
SUrIng Ihe TeIVEly Gary years These involved SUCH silvations and processes as USE Of open radiation source
Wiateral in an undSrgroune photography Tab 1S ‘EXPOSE CHUCIBISS to TEGTATION for thirty Minutes Tor
BROTOMIGTOGPaDIY THis MVOINVET UNSHIEIGSG SHON Wert ExPOSUTES 10 EN as yel UNdeteimined quantity of an
THUStEMTINET SOURS BGSAT THE RAGOCHEMICA HrOUp TeceIved UNdElerTNEd Guatilies of Uraniim Used in the 4.
Féin OF OMer TESCIOTS and TePOrealy ISOlated BIuOnIuM and fission Products Trom “sTugs” OF ingots of
TFACSTES WYANTUMT BSIWEEH IME PeTIOd OF THAT THOUGH TI4T THESE EXPOSUTES WETE To Masses MUCH Tower tha
THOSE Sxperieniced In the in Ihe IndUstial Uranium punticavon processes Radiation protection reportedly
‘CONSISTED GF USE OF TUBDET Gloves wilhiont Shielding Radiation mannonng was: introduced chy i the

IGTET SIEGES OF IHS DIOCESES AS THIS WES a MeInOUS Cevelopment and not an indusinal process, the quantities
ania) Were limited and at a céenain por jortum was in as @ surragalé Tor formu because of

Chamicar Simianties THEre were reportedly Several unconirolied releases’ ‘of thorium resuttant trom exothermic

FeBETOTS GOME BUY WRN TeSUTTaRT COnTarmnatON OF Tre CHEMISTY BUTEIG THE TOTTIMT PIOCESSING work was

dust-Th

of Thonur isotopes is unknown Notably not all the Thorium received and processed was “frash"and
reports of handling Thorium ten years old with resultant accumulation of decay products was reported to us

Attach to Form B if necessary.

me or Social Security Number of First Petitioner: _Laurence Fuortes



Special Exposure Cohort Petition U.S. Department of Health and Human Services

under the Energy Employees Occupational enters for Disease Control and Prevention
Ainess Compensation Act Nationa! Institute for Occupational Safety and Health
OMB Number: 0920-0639 Expires: 05/31/2007

Special Exposure Cohort Petition — Form B Page 1 of 7

Edi

jour

General Instructions on Completing this Form (complete instructions are available in a separate packet):
Except for signatures, please PRINT all information clearly and neatly on the form.

Please read each of Parts A— G in this form and complete the pasts appropriate to you. If there is more
then one petitioner, then each petitioner should complete those sections of parts A — C of the form that apply
to them. Additional copies of the first two pages of this form are provided at the end of the form for this pur-
‘pose A maximum of three petitioners is allowed.

need more space to provide additional information, use the continuation Page provided at the end of
the form and attach the completed continuation page(s) to Form B
If you have questions about the use of this form, please call the following NIOSH toll-free phone number and
request to speak to someone in the Office of Compensation Analysis and Support about an SEC petition:
1-800-356-4674,

GA Labor Organization, StartatD on Page3

ityou © An Energy Employee (current or former), StartatC on Page2
are: 10) A Survivor (of a former Energy Employee), StartatB on Page 2
X A Representative (of a current or former Energy Employee), StartatA on Page 1

A Representative Information — Complete Section A if you are authorized by an Employee or

Survivor(s} to petition on behalf of a cl

Are you a contact person for an organization? QO Yes(GotoA.2)-- XNo (Go to A.3)
A2_— Organization Information:
Name of Organization
Position of Contact Person
N of Petition Representative:
AS ame ent PTAURENGS J. FUORTES, MD
MriMrs /Ms. First Name Middle Initial Last Name
A.4 Address:
UNIVERSITY OF IOWA, COLLEGE OF PUBLIG HEALTH, DEPARTMENT OF OCCUPATIONAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH
Sreet Ape P.O, BOX
SOWA CITY a 52246
City State Zip Code

‘A.5 Telephone Number: (319)335-9819
IA& Email Address: laurence-fuortes@uiowa.edu

A7 =X Check the box at left to indicate you have attached to the back of this form written authorization to
petition by the survivor(s) or employee(s) indicated in Parts B of C of this form. An authorization

it yoularerepréséntl

Name or Social Security Number of First Petitioner. Laurence Fuories

|
|
|
|



TABLE OF CONTERTS

oo Page
Scope — 3
Papen Sener 3
Results of Study
. Thoriun 3
Be Thoren 4
Beryllium 4
Radiation Measurements 4
Methed of Study
Sampling Procedures s
al Job Anslysis Sheets 7 -
Analytical Procedure «6?
Process Description
Thorius : 7,8
Berylliva 8
Discussion 85,20
Recommmndations
Thorium Production - 20,22,12
Beryllium Operations - 22
Operating Criteria 22,13
General 3

TABLE Io Daily Weighted Average Expomure
TABLE It = Tabula’ of Avg. Breathing Zone Samples
TABIBIT~s Tabulation of Avg. General Air Samples
TABIE IV = Radiation Meamuresente

Pig. 1 = Chart of Avg. Deily Weighted Exposures |
Figs. 2 to 8 ~ ~ Operating Area Layouts Showing Breathing
and Geners! Air - Thorium & Thoron « Values
APPENDIX a
Job Analyits Sheets
APPEYDIK B

Sample Recard Sheete
(copies #2 & #6 only)

USA 012512



Reo. #23 Mecharge the effluent of the Kinney vacuum pump
“into the ventilation systex.

@, Machining Areas
Reo, #2h Provide local exhaust ventilation at willing machine,
Room 22. -

oa

Reo, #25 Provide exhaust ventilation at saw and lathe in Roon

% .
2. Beryllium Operations
Rec. #26 Confine all loading and weighing operations within #
ventilated bood.

Ret. #27 Provide ventilated enclosure at site of dumping Bed
lime charge into large nixer. :

Rec. #28 Provide ventilation at discharge of large mixer.

3. Operating Criteria.
Rec. #29

1, the following operating criteria should be met in the Metal2ur-
gical Building:

a. the datiy average personel te long-lived thoriua
alphas should be less than 70 yale

be Ganka radiation ~ naximm or whole bedy or any pert (except
hands or forearns) should not exceed 300 mr/wk.

oe. Beta plus game, uhole tody or any part (except hands or
“ forearas) should not exceed 500 ureps/zk,.no Dore than 300
of which should be gamut, .

d, The bands and forearns should be less than 1600 ar game
or 1500 reps beta plus gama.

€. Weekly average concent on of thorium dust should be io
greater than 0,7 d/; at all places beyond the site peri-
reter. (Based on 1% of Sn-plant preferred lovel}

Ree, #30

2. A weekly radiation survey of all production, lockor and lunch
room facilities should be made.- In addition, a ronthiy *spot®
survey should be made in the other Metallurgy Butiding facklities.

. : . alte ae

USA 012521



Special Exposure Cohort Petition U.S. Department of Health and Human Services
uader the Energy Emp‘oyees Occupational Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
Hiness Compensation Act Nationai institute for Occupational Safety and Health

a4 . OMB Number: 0920-0639 Expires: 06/31/2007
Petitioner Authorization Form Page 1 of 2

Use of this form is voluntary. Failure to use this form will not result in the denial of any right, benefit,

instructions:

if you wish to petition HHS to consider adding a class of employees to the Special Exposure Cohort and you
are NOT either a member of that class, a survivor of a member of that class, or a labor organization
representing or having represented members of that class, then 42 CFR Part 83, Section 83 7(c) requires
that you obtain written authorization. You can obtain such authorization from either an employee who is a
member of the class or a survivor of such an employee You may use this form to obtain such authorization
and submit the completed form to NIOSH with the related petition Please print legibly

For Further Information: If you have questions about these instructions, please call the following NIOSH
toll-free phone number and request to speak to someone in the Office of Compensation Analysis and
Support about an SEC petition: 1-800-356-4674.

Authorization for Individual or Entity to Petition HHS on Behalf of a Class of Employees for
Addition to the Special Exposure Cohort

MEMBER oF AMES LAS Worx FoRCE

- oT 7 # PO Box
City, State, Zip Code of Class Member or Survivor

do hereby authorize:
haurence Foortes
Name of Petitioner
Qarversity og Tou, College of Public Heals, 2124 westlacsn
Address of Petitioner “Apt # . P.O Box

ZTowa City, town S2AZYL
City, State and Zip Code of Petitioner

to petition the Department of Health and Human Services on ehalf of a class of employees
that includes; Throagh Urania Tt ecessing, ciuites,

Ames haboratord Prdacion,S conte Tecin eR and Support Shel
Name of Class Member (employee, not the employee's survivor)

for the addition of the class to the Special Exposure Cohort, under the Energy Employee’s
Occupational Iliness Compensation Program Act (42 U.S.C. §§ 7384-7385).

in providing this authorization, I recognize that the petitioner named above will have all the rights

of a petitioner as nrovid~4 for der 42 CFR Part 83. _
done Z OG.
Shay my wr wiaoe MEMOE. yy ourvivor Datel]
Name or Seca! Security Number of First Petitioner __

(ss of , )



'
|

246 INDUSTRIAL MEDICINE

‘At low Jevels of uranium concentration the sodium fluoride itself
becomes the deciding factor in limiting the sensitivity of the method.
The purest sodium fluoride it has been possible to obtain gives the
same amount of fluorescence as 0 0002 yg of uranium per 300 mg of

400,000

40,000 |—~

4000 j-~

400 >

INSTRUMENT READING, ARBITRARY UNITS

1 L | :
0.00001 0.0004 0.004 OOF O48 140
URANIUM IN O4 ML URINE, 2G

Fig, 7.1—Fluorescence photometer calibration curve for uzanivm plus urine.

NaF, Therefore, although the instrument itself can at least theoreti-
cally detect the fluorescence from 0.000001 pg of uranium, the ac~
curacy of the analysis falls off rapidly below 0.0001 yg.

4. STUDIES OF URANIUM EXCRETION IN MANHATTAN PROJECT
PERSONNEL

The studies comprised 170 determinations on 86 individuals ex-
posed to various uranium compounds on the Ames, Chicago, and Oak
Ridge Projects.

4.1 Collection of Samples from Ames and Chicago Personnel,
Upon leaving work Saturday noon, the men were given a clean bottle
enclosed within two large envelopes. They were instructed to remove

URANIUM EXCRETION STUDIES 247

the outer envelope at home after carefully washing their hands. The
second envelope was to be opened after bathing Sunday evening or
Monday morning. The urine sample was to be passed into the bottle
after again washing the hands and before getting dressed. The bottle

40

&
G
#
2
gE "3
g &F Pd 4
3 |
E ~
2 4
Gi
8
6 0400 b- -
& E 4
Z [- 4
$ i ca
>
g - 4
&
. » ca
soo ol yal
0.0400 0.400 4,0 40

OBTAINED CONCENTRATION, MG/LITER

Fig 12—Recovery by the Metallurgical Laboratory of-uranium added to urine (un-
knowns prepared at the University of Rochester) @ denotes single point; © denotes
twa (superimposed) points.

was then to be returned to the envelope. The samples thus obtained
were sent to the Chicago laboratory for analysis. Except for the
dilute standard uranium solutions, no uranium was handled in the
building housing this laboratory. The nearest other butlding of the
Metallurgy Laboratory was three blocks away.

4.2 Analytical Procedure. Analyses were made in duplicate ex~
cept in some of the earlier studies; the fluorometric method of analy-
‘sis mentioned above was used

4.3 Results. (a) Iowa State College Personnel, The largest num-
ber of analyses were made on urine of personnel working on the Ames
Project at Iowa State College. Exposure was chiefly to the UF, salt.



252 INDUSTRIAL MEDICINE

leveling off of uranium concentration to approximately 5 to 10 ug per
liter at the end of the period.

(b) Metallurgical Laboratory, University of Chicago Thirty-eight
analyses have been made of urine from 28 individuals in the Chicago
Metallurgical Laboratory. Of these individuals, five were employed
at the Argonne Laboratory. Exposure was chiefly to uranium oxide.

Table 7 6—Study of Urantum Excretion in Urine of Oak Ridge Personnel

Amount of
Days after uranium,
Sample* lant exposure ag/iter
fa 1 it
tb 2 4
ta 10
2b 8
3a a a0
3b 3 1”
4a, 3 3
f 4 a
$a 2 rt
) “3 5
6a i »
& 2 9
Ta 3 20
» 4 4 .
fa 1 “4
&% 2 5% 4
Sa 1 3 :
ob 2 1 5
10a 9

“The letter “a" denotes samples obtained June 18-16, 1945; “‘b” denotes samples
obtained June 16-17, 1946.

The analyses were made for the most part during 1945 when ex~
posures were relatively low.

In only two instances was more than 10 wg of uranium per liter
found, In six cases 5 to 10 zg per liter was present The highest
value in the group was 18 yg per liter.

(c) Oak Ridge, Tenn, The uranium concentration was determined
in two consecutive 24-hr collections of urine obtained from 10 hospi-
talized Army personnel. As noted in Table 7.8, these individuals were
away from work for 1 to 3 days before being hospitalized. It should
be noted that the uranium concentration in the first day’s collection of
urine is in every-case higher thanthe second day’s collection (average
first day = 15.9 yg per liter; average second day = 6.3 yg per liter).

URANIUM EXCRETION STUDIES 253

Since these men had been away from exposure for as long as 3 days at
the time-of hospitalization, it is probably safe to assume that urine
collected the morning after exposure would have been comparable in
most instances to the level of 20 to 100 wg per liter found in exposed
individuals in the plant at Ames, Iowa..

(@ Control Subjects, An attempt was made to determine the ura-
nium concentration in wine from control subjects with no uranium
exposure other than that normally encountered, Using 0.1 ml of urine
for analysis, values of less than 2 wg per liter were found in the
urines of five students at the Veterinary School of Medicine at lowa
State College. Using greater precautions 0.1- and 0.3-ml portions of
urine from five medical students at the University of Chicago were
analyzed and found to contain less than 1 yg of uranium per liter.
Analysis of known amounts of uranium added to 0,8-mi portions of
the same urines showed 43 to 56 per cent fluorescence quenching.
The amount of fluorescence detected was too smalito ascertain accu-
rately the exact amount of uranium present. It is likely, however,
that it ranged from 0.1 tol pg per iter, This amount is just beyond
the present sensitivity range of our method, which employs only 0.1-
ml samples ‘of urine for analysis, More accurate study would there-
fore require the use of 1 to 10 ml of urine and preliminary purifi-
cation to reduce the concentration of quenching substances,

5. DISCUSSION

From the data presented it is obvious that studies of uranium in
urine can yield a valuable index of previous exposure to uranium,
Unfortunately, however, studies are still Ssuftictent to permit full
interpretation of these data, Specifically, it would be of help to have
the answers to the following questions:

1. What do the data mean in terms of uranium deposited in the
tissues?

2. Would afalysis of blood for uranium be preferable to analysis
of urine since. there would be less chance for contamination and for:
variations due to such factors as diet and kidney function?

3, What is the dangerous concentration of uranium in urine, blood,
or tissue?

Since there are no. data available concerning either the uranium
content of tissues from exposed personnel ox uranium toxicity in
human beings, these questions cannot be answered. Further quanti-
tative discussion is therefore superfluous at the present time. Cer-
tain observations, however, may be in order.